> Il giorno 25 gen 2017, alle ore 17:13, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>
> On 01/25/2017 01:46 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>
>>> Il giorno 23 gen 2017, alle ore 18:42, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>>
>>> On 01/23/2017 10:04 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> Il giorno 18 gen 2017, alle ore 17:21, Jens Ax
On 01/25/2017 01:46 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>
>> Il giorno 23 gen 2017, alle ore 18:42, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>
>> On 01/23/2017 10:04 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>>
Il giorno 18 gen 2017, alle ore 17:21, Jens Axboe ha
scritto:
On 01/18/2017 08:14 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>
> Il giorno 23 gen 2017, alle ore 18:42, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>
> On 01/23/2017 10:04 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>
>>> Il giorno 18 gen 2017, alle ore 17:21, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>>
>>> On 01/18/2017 08:14 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
according to the function blk_mq_sched_put_request, t
On 01/23/2017 10:04 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>
>> Il giorno 18 gen 2017, alle ore 17:21, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>
>> On 01/18/2017 08:14 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>> according to the function blk_mq_sched_put_request, the
>>> mq.completed_request hook seems to always be invoked (if set) for a
>>
> Il giorno 18 gen 2017, alle ore 17:21, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>
> On 01/18/2017 08:14 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> according to the function blk_mq_sched_put_request, the
>> mq.completed_request hook seems to always be invoked (if set) for a
>> request for which the mq.put_rq_priv is invoked (i
On 01/18/2017 08:14 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> according to the function blk_mq_sched_put_request, the
> mq.completed_request hook seems to always be invoked (if set) for a
> request for which the mq.put_rq_priv is invoked (if set).
Correct, any request that came out of blk_mq_sched_get_request()
> Il giorno 17 gen 2017, alle ore 11:49, Paolo Valente
> ha scritto:
>
> [NEW RESEND ATTEMPT]
>
>> Il giorno 17 gen 2017, alle ore 03:47, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>
>> On 12/22/2016 08:28 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>>
Il giorno 19 dic 2016, alle ore 22:05, Jens Axboe ha
scritto:
>
[NEW RESEND ATTEMPT]
> Il giorno 17 gen 2017, alle ore 03:47, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>
> On 12/22/2016 08:28 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>
>>> Il giorno 19 dic 2016, alle ore 22:05, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>>
>>> On 12/19/2016 11:21 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> Il giorno 19 dic 2016, al
On 12/22/2016 08:28 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>
>> Il giorno 19 dic 2016, alle ore 22:05, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>
>> On 12/19/2016 11:21 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>>
Il giorno 19 dic 2016, alle ore 16:20, Jens Axboe ha
scritto:
On 12/19/2016 04:32 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>
On Thu, 2016-12-22 at 09:12 -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 04:57:36PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-12-22 at 08:52 -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> > > This approach occurred to us, but we couldn't figure out a way to make
> > > blk_mq_tag_to_rq() work with it.
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 04:57:36PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-12-22 at 08:52 -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> > This approach occurred to us, but we couldn't figure out a way to make
> > blk_mq_tag_to_rq() work with it. From skimming over the patches, I
> > didn't see a solution to t
On Thu, 2016-12-22 at 08:52 -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> This approach occurred to us, but we couldn't figure out a way to make
> blk_mq_tag_to_rq() work with it. From skimming over the patches, I
> didn't see a solution to that problem.
Hello Omar,
Can you clarify your comment? Since my patches
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 04:23:24PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 17:12 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > From the discussion last time, I looked into the feasibility of having
> > two sets of tags for the same request pool, to avoid having to copy
> > some of the request fields a
On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 17:12 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> From the discussion last time, I looked into the feasibility of having
> two sets of tags for the same request pool, to avoid having to copy
> some of the request fields at dispatch and completion time. To do that,
> we'd have to replace the dr
> Il giorno 19 dic 2016, alle ore 22:05, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>
> On 12/19/2016 11:21 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>
>>> Il giorno 19 dic 2016, alle ore 16:20, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>>
>>> On 12/19/2016 04:32 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> Il giorno 17 dic 2016, alle ore 01:12, Jens Ax
On 12/19/2016 11:21 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>
>> Il giorno 19 dic 2016, alle ore 16:20, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>
>> On 12/19/2016 04:32 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>>
Il giorno 17 dic 2016, alle ore 01:12, Jens Axboe ha
scritto:
This is version 4 of this patchset, version 3
> Il giorno 19 dic 2016, alle ore 16:20, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>
> On 12/19/2016 04:32 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>
>>> Il giorno 17 dic 2016, alle ore 01:12, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>>
>>> This is version 4 of this patchset, version 3 was posted here:
>>>
>>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-bloc
On 12/19/2016 08:20 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 12/19/2016 04:32 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>
>>> Il giorno 17 dic 2016, alle ore 01:12, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>>
>>> This is version 4 of this patchset, version 3 was posted here:
>>>
>>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-block&m=148178513407631&w=2
>>>
>>
On 12/19/2016 04:32 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>
>> Il giorno 17 dic 2016, alle ore 01:12, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>>
>> This is version 4 of this patchset, version 3 was posted here:
>>
>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-block&m=148178513407631&w=2
>>
>> From the discussion last time, I looked into the
> Il giorno 17 dic 2016, alle ore 01:12, Jens Axboe ha scritto:
>
> This is version 4 of this patchset, version 3 was posted here:
>
> https://marc.info/?l=linux-block&m=148178513407631&w=2
>
> From the discussion last time, I looked into the feasibility of having
> two sets of tags for the sa
This is version 4 of this patchset, version 3 was posted here:
https://marc.info/?l=linux-block&m=148178513407631&w=2
>From the discussion last time, I looked into the feasibility of having
two sets of tags for the same request pool, to avoid having to copy
some of the request fields at dispatch
21 matches
Mail list logo
